Percentage of hippies that come here

This applies well to the waiter saying 'dear' example.

 

Not by definition but: Problem is when you don't explain yourself and make abstract (or nonsensical/with no meaning) sentences you set yourself up to such a thing. Also I am glad that it's good and fine now. That was the main thing i was trying to get across

I have not much positive to say about petty insults either but I think in this case it was accompanied by some wellment criticism. True, Gas also called you pretty much a hippie cliché and you took that a bit personally. All very logical. I think he might went on about that a bit because you went against that and even proclaimed you can not be bothered by being perceived as a stereotype, therefor can not be bothered looking like one. But it appears when one fellow hippie or hipforummer noticed the obvious (that you look like the stereotype) it seemed it bothered you anyway Not saying that it matters a lot, just saying how I see it.

I thought you were trying to get a point across... NoxiousGas also I think.

 

Perhaps also it applies in the sense that Indy Hippy means regarding a word doesn't mean anything. Of itself absent experiential conjugation a word doesn't mean anything.

A further consideration is whether a word needs to have a particular form in order to apply to a specific instance like need the word be elephant or could it be ephalump and still denote the same phenomena?

 

Stereotyping doesn't get a conversation anywhere. I do not like conversations that go no where. Hence why I am trying to move this one along, man. Also I don't see how wearing tye dye once in a while, or throwing up the occasional peace sign, or saying man, or far out, should be stereotyped as hippy. No problem acknowledging that taking it all the way can get a bit tedious, but it was originally meant as humor, apparently not humor that anyone got.
As to my point. My point was that ya'll try to make way more of a point of things than there is to make a point of.

 

We'll see in a future conversation I guess. If it REALLY hinders the convo I'm sure someone will point it out again. Like I said I don't mean to say your specific way of stereotypical communicating and styling yourself is automatically a bad thing but acknowledging that this is what you often are doing is only advisable. It seemed in some of your posts you either did not get that or thought really otherwise

 

You are correct in all that, as Indy was in his statements, but isn't this something every child comprehends at an relatively early age as they learn to navigate language and how to use it?

So I fail to see any new or interesting revelation in Indy's post that he seems to think he is imparting.

 

Crossed my mind as well

 

I think everyone thinks this description pretty accurate. We get the humor, it is suggested that you do not loose yours.

How sharp is sharp? A splitting maul is good for splitting wood but not sharp enough for brain surgery if you get my point.

 

Or perhaps simply didn't mind one way or the other. If a person chooses to call me a stereotypical cliche then that is their decision to make. If they use that as an excuse to not try and understand anything I say, that is also their decision. I will be one of the first to acknowledge that I learn alot from the more meaningful threads here, man. I never put down any one person's belief or ideal. To do that would be to deny that these things are correct inherently.
While I may find some beliefs that have been stated before to be somewhat basic and at the same time over cooked "to put it in terms that my audience can understand" I still acknowledge them.

 

420%

 

I think it was not used as an excuse to not try and understand what you said at all. It seems to me it was given 'merely' as the reason he did not understand what you said.

Did I or Gas put down your beliefs or ideals?

 

I was stating that because I have occasionally had people tell me that I come across as insensitive to other's beliefs and ideals. Not to say that others put down mine. In reality regardless of what one says about my philosophy they cannot truly put it down, the very words they use to deny or discredit are the same in essence as my belief. Also I do not always talk like a 60's "cliche' just the last couple weeks.....or at least not like a total 60's guy More eastern than 60's

 

Well lots of arrested development going on and you can detect it in defensive responses at any age. These responses really have nothing to do with the subject at hand so the appearance is that they are delinquent. It is a sign that someone has not come into the full stature of themselves and they are having questions about how they appear. Youthful discontent.

 

What exactly does a child learn at an early age? That words don't actually mean anything at all? I would agree, and yet here humanity is thinking that their words can move the universe.

 

A child that learned a vocabulary depends even more on it than an adult. How can a child picture that words don't mean anything at all? Because they are not shaped by society or the consensus yet or something? That does not give them more insight.

 

You are right of course, yet at the same time who can understand anything fully without first doing away with their preconceptions? Is it insight to know that you must first understand nothing to grasp something?

 

Valid questions when thinking of children and fixed preconceptions, but I'm not sure how relevant they are in regarding to 2 adults communicating in english about a specific subject. Especially on an internetforum were all we have to communicate are typed words indeed.

 

You can talk a man to sleep and you can inspire him to give his life for a cause and in this way we come to the metaphysical notation that a man is justified by his words. Moving the universe is not necessary but moving with it is. The mind being abstract is bound by it's symbolic conceptions.

 

It is insight to know knowledge flows freely into an open mind. It is not insightful to think that you can apprehend anything without the sense to make sense of things.

 

Does not a flower need water to grow? If allowed sand and dust will desicate the flower.

If one feels no need to justify then why attempt a justification? You are right that we must move with the universe. Each in their own way, this is the basis of all true understanding is it not? Why must a mind be bound?

"Sense" only allows you to understand what you percieve. Non-sense allows you to be perceptionless.